Douglas County school board members Meghann Silverthorn and Judith Reynolds got carried away during a meeting in March with a 15-year-old Ponderosa High student who was organizing a protest over district policies. Some of their words of caution to her were lurid and inappropriate.

But the reaction to their mistake, which achieved a new low this week when protesters demanding their resignations disrupted a school board meeting until it was adjourned, is also out of line. Not only is the behavior an insult to the democratic process and free speech, the demand for the women’s resignation is overwrought given the context of the incident.

That context is laid out in a report by the law firm Sherman & Howard, and was released this week. Critics are claiming that Gordon Netzorg’s report is a whitewash based on technicalities. And it is true (and important) that he found no district policies had been violated. But in fact the report is thorough and dispassionate, and provides a wealth of facts necessary for an informed judgment.

Silverthorn and Reynolds are accused of bullying student Grace Davis in a March 4 meeting in which they discussed safety and liability concerns, among other things. Silverthorn referred to injuries suffered by Denver police officer John Adsit while escorting protesters in 2014 and said Davis’ protest could be “ripe for the Denver police officer situation to happen again right here.” Reynolds suggested, without consulting an attorney, that “if things go sideways,” liability “may land squarely on you or your parents’ shoulders.”

These comments were heavy-handed and wrong. But let’s be clear: School officials do have a right to express opinions about a protest that was scheduled for school hours and whose leader was encouraging students to “ditch” classes for the day. Board members are free to talk to students. And officials actually have a duty to be concerned about safety during such an event.

Davis was no shrinking violet. She met with the school principal and an assistant principal on March 1 (while secretly recording the meeting) and on March 2 with the principal and two other top district officials (while recording that meeting, too). At the second meeting, officials not only emphasized safety concerns, they “raised the specter of protests in Selma, Alabama, where the police turned fire hoses on people” — arguably a more outrageous image than those evoked by the board members.

But Davis was undeterred. As Notzorg writes, she “proceeded with the protest exactly as planned” on March 9, and there is no evidence she was reprimanded or faced any adverse consequences. For that matter, she sounded “poised” and “articulate” during the March 4 meeting (which, as you’ll guess, she recorded), as she has in other interactions with school officials.

Moreover, it seems clear that Silverthorn and Reynolds did not intend to intimidate Davis — a conclusion that is important in assessing how they should be treated.

The take-no-prisoners protesters at recent board meetings don’t care about such subtleties, of course. They knew what they wanted — Silverthorn’s and Reynold’s heads — before the law firm’s findings were even released.

So be it. But they have no right to turn public meetings into scenes of disruption. Let this week’s fiasco be the last of its kind.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Injection sites about safety, providing a path to recover Re: “Safe injection site bill shelved,” Feb. 20 news story Understandably, a person’s first reaction to providing safe injection sites for drug users might seem ludicrous. But, upon educating oneself and learning more about the research and purpose behind the sites, safety for all is the No. 1 premise. Republican minority...

The Catholic dioceses of Colorado should have reported to authorities any and all accusations of sexual abuse decades ago, but we must praise the development that finally came Tuesday when church officials announced they will open their records for scrutiny.